Tools Measuring Health Literacy in Critically Ill Patients and Their Caregivers: A Scoping Review.

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
Thérèse G Poulin, Karla D Krewulak, Nina M Carcamo Arakawa, Anmol Shahid, Henry T Stelfox, Kirsten M Fiest
{"title":"Tools Measuring Health Literacy in Critically Ill Patients and Their Caregivers: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Thérèse G Poulin, Karla D Krewulak, Nina M Carcamo Arakawa, Anmol Shahid, Henry T Stelfox, Kirsten M Fiest","doi":"10.1097/CCM.0000000000007382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Health literacy, the ability to understand and use health information, is important for critically ill patients and their caregivers in the neonatal ICU (NICU), PICU, and adult ICU to make informed decisions and navigate complex care. This review aimed to identify and summarize tools used to assess health literacy in critically ill patients or their caregivers.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO through July 24, 2025.</p><p><strong>Study selection: </strong>Included articles reported on tools to assess health literacy in critically ill patients or their caregivers. Two reviewers independently performed screening and data extraction.</p><p><strong>Data extraction: </strong>Two independent reviewers extracted data in Covidence. Data items included study characteristics (country in which the study was conducted, study funding, study setting) and health literacy tool characteristics (tool user, types of questions in the tool, method of tool administration, if the tool was created by the study team, and if a full version was available in the publication).</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>We included 92 articles describing 84 health literacy tools. Tools measured: 1) topic-specific clinical knowledge (e.g., organ donation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation; n = 24/84, 29%; NICU: n = 9; PICU: n = 1; ICU: n = 14); 2) ICU prognosis, diagnosis, and treatment (n = 23/84, 27%; NICU: 6; PICU: 3; ICU: n = 15); 3) neonatal and parenting (n = 13/84, 15%; all NICU); 4) general health literacy abilities (n = 11/84, 13%; NICU: n = 6; PICU: n = 2; ICU: n = 7); 5) information needs (n = 4/84, 5%; NICU: n = 1; PICU: n = 0; ICU: n = 3); 6) readiness for discharge (n = 3/84, 4%; all NICU); 7) decision-making (n = 3/84, 4%; all NICU); 8) health-related behaviors (n = 2/84, 2%; NICU: n = 1; ICU: n = 1); and 9) research participation (n = 1/84, 1%; NICU).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although several health literacy tools exist, they often focus on individual knowledge of specific aspects of ICU care, with less attention to how understanding is produced within the clinical context through interactions among patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers. This may limit their ability to reflect how health literacy functions in critical illness. Assessment of health literacy requires pairing the appropriate tools with interaction-focused approaches to guide communication and support informed decision-making in ICU settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":10765,"journal":{"name":"Critical Care Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Care Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/CCM.0000000000007382","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Health literacy, the ability to understand and use health information, is important for critically ill patients and their caregivers in the neonatal ICU (NICU), PICU, and adult ICU to make informed decisions and navigate complex care. This review aimed to identify and summarize tools used to assess health literacy in critically ill patients or their caregivers.

Data sources: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and PsycINFO through July 24, 2025.

Study selection: Included articles reported on tools to assess health literacy in critically ill patients or their caregivers. Two reviewers independently performed screening and data extraction.

Data extraction: Two independent reviewers extracted data in Covidence. Data items included study characteristics (country in which the study was conducted, study funding, study setting) and health literacy tool characteristics (tool user, types of questions in the tool, method of tool administration, if the tool was created by the study team, and if a full version was available in the publication).

Data synthesis: We included 92 articles describing 84 health literacy tools. Tools measured: 1) topic-specific clinical knowledge (e.g., organ donation, cardiopulmonary resuscitation; n = 24/84, 29%; NICU: n = 9; PICU: n = 1; ICU: n = 14); 2) ICU prognosis, diagnosis, and treatment (n = 23/84, 27%; NICU: 6; PICU: 3; ICU: n = 15); 3) neonatal and parenting (n = 13/84, 15%; all NICU); 4) general health literacy abilities (n = 11/84, 13%; NICU: n = 6; PICU: n = 2; ICU: n = 7); 5) information needs (n = 4/84, 5%; NICU: n = 1; PICU: n = 0; ICU: n = 3); 6) readiness for discharge (n = 3/84, 4%; all NICU); 7) decision-making (n = 3/84, 4%; all NICU); 8) health-related behaviors (n = 2/84, 2%; NICU: n = 1; ICU: n = 1); and 9) research participation (n = 1/84, 1%; NICU).

Conclusions: Although several health literacy tools exist, they often focus on individual knowledge of specific aspects of ICU care, with less attention to how understanding is produced within the clinical context through interactions among patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers. This may limit their ability to reflect how health literacy functions in critical illness. Assessment of health literacy requires pairing the appropriate tools with interaction-focused approaches to guide communication and support informed decision-making in ICU settings.

测量危重病人及其照护者健康素养的工具:范围回顾
目的:健康素养,即理解和使用健康信息的能力,对于新生儿重症监护室(NICU)、PICU和成人重症监护室的危重患者及其护理人员做出明智的决定和处理复杂的护理非常重要。本综述旨在确定和总结用于评估危重患者或其护理人员健康素养的工具。数据来源:我们检索了MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL和PsycINFO,截止到2025年7月24日。研究选择:纳入关于评估危重患者或其护理人员健康素养的工具的文章。两名审稿人独立进行筛选和数据提取。数据提取:两名独立审稿人提取了covid中的数据。数据项目包括研究特征(开展研究的国家、研究资金、研究环境)和卫生素养工具特征(工具使用者、工具中的问题类型、工具管理方法、工具是否由研究小组创建,以及出版物中是否有完整版本)。数据综合:我们纳入了92篇文章,描述了84种卫生素养工具。测量工具:1)特定主题的临床知识(如器官捐献、心肺复苏;n = 24/84, 29%; NICU: n = 9; PICU: n = 1; ICU: n = 14);2) ICU预后、诊断及治疗情况(n = 23/84,占27%;NICU: 6例;PICU: 3例;ICU: 15例);3)新生儿和父母(n = 13/ 84,15 %;均为NICU);4)一般健康素养能力(n = 11/84, 13%; NICU: n = 6; PICU: n = 2; ICU: n = 7);5)信息需求(n = 4/ 84,5%; NICU: n = 1; PICU: n = 0; ICU: n = 3);6)出院准备(n = 3/ 84,4 %;所有新生儿重症监护室);7)决策(n = 3/ 84,4 %;均为NICU);8)健康相关行为(n = 2/ 84,2%; NICU: n = 1; ICU: n = 1);9)研究参与(n = 1/ 84,1%; NICU)。结论:虽然存在一些健康素养工具,但它们通常侧重于对ICU护理特定方面的个人知识,而较少关注如何通过患者、护理人员和医疗保健提供者之间的互动在临床环境中产生理解。这可能会限制他们反映健康素养在危重疾病中发挥作用的能力。对卫生素养的评估需要将适当的工具与以互动为重点的方法相结合,以指导ICU环境中的沟通和支持知情决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Critical Care Medicine
Critical Care Medicine 医学-危重病医学
CiteScore
16.30
自引率
5.70%
发文量
728
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Critical Care Medicine is the premier peer-reviewed, scientific publication in critical care medicine. Directed to those specialists who treat patients in the ICU and CCU, including chest physicians, surgeons, pediatricians, pharmacists/pharmacologists, anesthesiologists, critical care nurses, and other healthcare professionals, Critical Care Medicine covers all aspects of acute and emergency care for the critically ill or injured patient. Each issue presents critical care practitioners with clinical breakthroughs that lead to better patient care, the latest news on promising research, and advances in equipment and techniques.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书